XB2003 175 Hp, Cone or No Cone?

[Ventura I]

Just got a XB2003 with a Johnson Fast Strike 175 (I know need more motor, it's a new powerhead so it's staying on), I think Bass and Walleye had an article (I can't find it) that said no nose cone would perform better below 85. Thoughts? 10" setback, hydraulic jackplate.

Thanks,
Fred

 

[xb03fs]

I have a 200 Merc and am in the process of learning to drive. I would say cone it. The higher I go the better it handles. If I am losing speed due to it, I am currently only driving very low 70's thats fine because before the nose cone it drove much worse. Maybe if I played with the setup more it would have gotten better without the cone but it is night and day better.

If I am leaving a few mph on the table using a cone thats fine, I doubt I will ever push it over 85 with this 200 and thats fine the improved handling is well worth losing just a tad bit of speed.

My 2 cents as a learning to drive newbie Still 1" under but going to .5 under next trip

 

[Darth VMAX]

This is sort of a "catch 22" type of deal.
True, unless you have a empty load you most likely won't hitting the speeds that will cause the air pockets to form on your l/u. BUT...due to the high water intakes you will have to run your prop-shaft pretty low causing some pretty bad handling. If your boat handles bad then you won't be getting her to full potential anyways.

IMHO, I WOULD get your lower-unit coned with a LWP in exchange for the excess drag it MAY impose for much better handling. I believe the OMC's need to have the bearing carrier pinned as well if you run a surfacing application.

 

[Ventura I]

I should have noted that I am limited to 2.5" below because of water pressure.

Fred

 

[Ventura I]

I believe the OMC's need to have the nearing carrier pinned as well if you run a surfacing application.

Hmmm, if the lower won't hold up, that's not good. Anybody running OMC lowers high without problems?

 

[Darth VMAX]

Sam Baker is one of the resident OMC/BRP guru's and if he see's this thread can explain the details. From my understanding the bearing carrier on OMC's won't stand up to surfacing applications. You can pin them and they will live much longer. Those Eagle OMC's are a nice, sdtrong, lightweight motor. They just need a little l/u help on a true performance boat.

 

[RedAllison]

Speedwise, I doubt you'll see any sizeable difference but handling wise it'll be LIGHTYEARS difference. The A-boats just pretty much hate dragging gearcase through the water at practically any speed. Over 70 you'll be fighting it, with a surfaced case it's much smoother "sailing".

:at the bar
RA

 

[Ventura I]

So I'm guessing a cone is not needed for a speed issue (prop blow out), just to get a low water pickup for better handling. Is there a better option to adding a low water pickup? Maybe just filling in the top couple holes will get the motor close to where it needs to be?

Thanks

 

[xb03fs]

I am a new user, still nowhere close to the potential, handleing is night and day difference,

I could not drive past low 60s' now rock solid up through low 70's, motor still being in breakin TPS needed adjusting and motor still to low was the limiting facotor, not the walking which became very managable at least through 70

 

[Waterdigger]

Send lower unit to JC's have it coned and low water pickup. Pin bearing carrier @ 12 oclock
and 6 oclock behind carrier bolt tabs. No need to drill holes from outside the gear case housing through carrier.Just my 1.999 cents

The Eagle likes AIR...

 

[Lakeman (Allison)]

Ventura 1: I had a Johnson Fast Strike 175 on a xb2003. It had a bobs nosecone on it and it would run 82mph with a 28 Raker, worked by DAH Propellers.The boat drove really good. If you are interested, I am selling it..just let me know..

 

[chad202]

Just because it would be coned, don't mean you'd have to run it sky high. U could cone it and run 1/2 below and the handling would be huge difference to running 2.5 below. In my blazer, the blowout point a
with a torquemaster lowerunit was 82.5-83. But that was a merc.

 

[Lotus 50]

My 150XR4 on my SS2000 has a cone, and it is very sensitive to engine height, both for carrying weight, or for the last 5 mph when running light. It's nice to be able adjust the height for load or speed, and never worry about water pressure.

 

[Ventura I]

Lakeman: At what height did you run the Raker? Price?

Was your speed in a light boat? I can run right to about 70 with a 27 Renegade before the boat starts chine walking, this is by myself but with trolling motor, 3 batteries, tackle.

Thanks,
Fred

 

[F2008]

Fred, different boat I know, but for what it's worth, when I had my OMC (lower was coned by Titus) on my 2002, I ran a 26 Raker and a 25 Renegade and neither ran as good as a stock 27 Trophy. ....and that never ran as good as my 28p Hydromotive QIVOT.

No complaints from me about Titus' OMC lower mods. Mine ran and handled fine. I pinned the carrier myself. ....ran it high (surface piercing) most of the time with no issues.

 

[Lakeman (Allison)]

Ventura I: not sure on the motor height but I would say around 1/2 to 1/8 below the pad at 12" set back. At 82mph, light tackle load, 3/4 to full tank of gas, Myself, and three batteries and trolling motor. 28 raker is a 8-9 out of 10. $300.00 or best offer. two people in the boat at about 400lbs. it would run 78mph.

 

[robert]

Has anyone done any lower unit work on a 300XS? I have one on an xb21 and know there is a lot of torque but it is masked by hydraulic steering. If anyone has done any lower unit work, who did it, and what are your impressions of the results. Thanks.
Robert

 

[Ventura I]

F2008: I have a 26 QIVOT, with the prop deep the Renegade seems to do better. Maybe with the prop higher the QIVOT would shine? Pinning the carrier just keeps it from loosening, correct? Is exact location of the pins/setscrews important?

Lakeman: I've located a 26 Raker that I'm going to try. Will see how a 26 works, and let you know about your 28.

Thanks

 

[strip]

The theory that a cone will hurt you under 85 does not apply to Allisons. Most heavier boats use excess trim to lift the bow. This over trim causes a coned motor to actually act like the lip on a crankbait (hydramotive cones have a unique shape that reduces this problem)pulling the transome down and causing excessive drag on the boat. Hense the 2-3 mph loss on most lower speed set ups. With the alli, The lowered water pickups are essential to getting the motor high enough to be effective with this hull design. Plugging the top few holes will not make a significant differance in engine hight. I strongly suggest you send your LU to a reputible shop and have the work you need done. It will be well worth the money in the long run.

 

[F2008]

F2008: I have a 26 QIVOT, with the prop deep the Renegade seems to do better. Maybe with the prop higher the QIVOT would shine? Pinning the carrier just keeps it from loosening, correct? Is exact location of the pins/setscrews important?

Lakeman: I've located a 26 Raker that I'm going to try. Will see how a 26 works, and let you know about your 28.

Thanks

Cool. ....which is why everyone recommends to try as many props as possible I guess.

As far as pinning the carrier, yes, that is what I was told. My experience consists of modding just one, so I'm far from any kind of authority. Found the procedure over on Scream & Fly.

I pinned mine at 4 equal locations, which I am told is big time overkill. Countersunk the ss screws and then epoxied / painted for a neat exterior finish. I really liked that motor, sorry it bought the farm.